Allahabad High Court
A482/10455/2025 of SURAJ SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. THE PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER on 18 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10455 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10455 of 2025
Court No. - 14
HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
2. This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 16.09.2011, summoning order dated 01.10.2011 as well as non-bailable warrant dated 06.11.2025 passed in Case No. 4504729 of 2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 208 of 2011, under Sections 308, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Bazar Khala, District Lucknow.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.09.2011 and till then the charge sheet was not filed. It is further submitted that later on, the charge sheet was filed on 16.09.2011, on which, cognizance was taken by the trial court on 01.10.2011. Drawing the attention of the Court towards the order sheet of the trial court annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the application, learned counsel for the applicant submits that neither any summon nor any notice was ever served on the applicant, as there is no endorsement in the order sheet in this regard, but the trial court directly issued non- bailable warrant on 06.11.2025 in mechanical manner, without observing that whether the summon was served on the applicant or Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Kumar Pandey, Kripa Shanker Misra, Krishna Chandra Pant, Siddhesh Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Suraj Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
not. It is also submitted that the proceedings of the case came into the knowledge of the applicant when the notice was issued to his sureties. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial and, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary.
4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicant, but he does not dispute the factual submission of learned counsel for the applicant, on the basis of order sheet of the trial court annexed with the application.
5. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, the order sheet of the trial court annexed with the application does not reveal about issuing of any summon or notice to the applicant. Thus, this Court is of the view that non-bailable warrant was issued by the court concerned without clarifying the fact that whether the notice has been served on the applicant or not.
6. In view of above, the non-bailable warrant dated 06.11.2025 as well as its consequential orders are hereby set aside.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial court and cooperate in the trial. December 18, 2025 VKS A482 No. 10455 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench